Home > Articles, Websites, What's Bugging Me > Article Screening & Rating

Article Screening & Rating

I belong to a web site where articles need to be screened and rated by members before they are published. While the article is in the screening room, the author’s name isn’t visible but the country it is directed at is. If it is directed at the global community there is no flag, otherwise a small image of an American, Canadian, Australian, etc flag appears next to the article name.

There are members who publish articles daily, weekly and sometimes occasionally. Some of these members never screen articles, and if they do, it seems that they only screen the articles their friends have posted. I have no proof of this, but just something I’ve observed.

Now, I don’t know if it’s the same people, because the screening is anonymous, but there are members who pick and choose the articles they will read. If the article has an American flag on it, it goes through the screening process fairly quickly. If it’s designated as global or another country, it can sit in the room for hours, sometimes days.

A fellow member published one yesterday as American and it went through the screening process in 7 hours. It actually had 3 screenings, within about 5 minutes of it being posted. Yet others will sometimes sit for hours before even one person will take the time to screen it and rate it.

At this time, there are 8 articles that need screening, 2 global, 3 American, 1 Philippines, 1 New Zealand and 1 Indian, they were all screened by someone at 353am, but at 637am, someone went in and screened just one of those articles and it has an American flag.

Selective screening. I detest people who behave in this manner. What makes them think they are better than others?

One article was posted on Dec. 14 at 10:05PM,, marked from New Zealand and discussing the tragedy at the mine. It finally cleared the screening room on Dec 16th at 3:53AM. Almost 30 hours, yet the American flagged one cleared yesterday in 7 hours, it was posted after this one. The odd thing about this article from New Zealand is that it had only needed one additional screening since Dec 15th at 5:18PM. Lets list it out so you can get a better picture of the times.

  • Dec 14th at 10:05PM – posted to screening room
  • Dec 15th at 5:18PM  – needed just one more screening
  • Dec 16th at 3:53AM  – finally published

Why are these things happening?

I have my own little story about what happened with one of my articles, but then some are holding a grudge, so I’ve decided to report on this one. I hadn’t planned to cover this article, it’s just what I’ve observed.

Because I like seeing the good in people, I did not want to believe that members are doing this to other members.

This is as good a place as any to say this. So here goes!

If you want to play games, go ahead. You don’t want to screen, just run around following people, go ahead.

FYI    Since returning to the web site just over two months ago,  I have read, screened, rated over 1250 articles, including the archives! This doesn’t count the many I couldn’t rate or had no wish to comment on.

When I went into the screening room, I read and rated every article. I also provided feedback when necessary.

What’s that equal? About 500 per month average?

Well, no more. There is no requirement to screen at the site before posting articles, so maybe I will do like the rest of them.

Now I know I am only one person, but like I showed you in the example above, just one person is all that’s needed sometimes to finally get your article published.

This is what’s bugging me today!

🙂

leave a comment »

© 2010-2011 Things in life I find annoying

Advertisements
  1. December 17, 2010 at 4:04 AM

    I belong to a website just like that! Whilst agreeing that partiality due to nationality is abhorrent and almost bizarre in this day on the ‘world wide web’ and something to be condemned, I must admit that I don’t always screen every article myself; partly time, I don’t get to stop by a lot; partly choice of subject – something on ‘groovy diapers for your baby’ probably won’t get a screening by me, nor will any of the plethora of SEO articles that appear daily since neither of these holds any interest for me, and I don’t possess any knowledge which would allow me to make an informed read. So I do pick and choose, but never on nationality, in fact I rarely notice those flags!
    It’s amazing you screen so many articles, a lot of work which should be appreciated but isn’t. Perhaps the site, which has all the stats, should create an award for the person who screens most articles over a year!

    • December 17, 2010 at 4:48 AM

      Thank you Peter for your kind words. I must admit there has been maybe half a dozen I’ve skipped over where I found the topic either offensive or not at all interesting. Yes, not everyone has the time to review all of them, but when it is done selectively it’s a real shame.
      Thanks again. 🙂

  2. December 18, 2010 at 12:51 AM

    I think you are wrong. I am always selective about what I punish my brain with. I didn’t screen the New Zealand tragedy as Wind River holds no interest for me.

    I check every SEO article and reject and mark low those that are bad. I read anything else that has an interesting headline.

    I don’t read about rooms and paint. That bores me, I don’t read about alternative health therapies or religion, those are likely to get offensive comments from me so best I stay out.

    The flag is of no relevance but on the whole I have rejected more article with the indian flag than any other. Does that make me racist?

    • December 18, 2010 at 8:35 AM

      I’ll answer the last question first – NO. At times I do selective screening and it’s not because of the flag.

      I have many interests and feel that I can be objective enough to identify the good from the bad. If I can’t, then I pass on it and move on to another. Being Canadian myself, there are certain American topics I stay away from especially when it has to do with a former president.

      I believe that people are not using the flag as it was intended. The flag should be used if you are targeting readers/members in a particular country. If the article is of a general nature and could apply to the entire global community, it should marked as such and then would carry no flag. Members still have the flag on their profile, it doesn’t change there.

      I think the members need to read the statement closely and decide where they want it to appear. Country specific articles still appear in the global community but will also appear in the specific country that was targeted.

      An article talking about the American health care programs, should be marked as American. However, SEO Tips should be directed to the global community.

      Maybe this will help to clarify the flag issue.

  3. December 28, 2010 at 6:34 AM

    I’m not screening a lot now,as I’m busy with other freelance projects, but whenever I get back to the site to respond to comments, I try to screen or comment on those that interest me — usually those about SEO or backlinks, or something unique like the Masada.
    When I was new, I also noticed the flags, and those that aren’t being screened fast. A thought like yours came to my mind, but I brushed it away — I could be wrong.
    But I still feel that most users are screening those topics they like regardless of the flags, and since there’s not enough time, many users screen only when they have a post queued for screening.

    • December 28, 2010 at 6:42 AM

      Thanks for your comments.

      I understand what you’re saying that not everyone has time to do a lot of screening, but there are some who never do any screening or do it selectively.

      Your thought was correct and I’ve heard it from several people.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: